As a liberal who knows a thing or two about the guts of ISPs I had many arguments about the wisdom of many "Net Neutrality" proposals with my friends. Some of the requirements people wanted amounted to being expected to fill out your tax forms while riding a unicycle along a tight rope.
Of course, the entire concept is bull. The (non-government) Internet developed under freedom of companies to freely decide to interconnect according to their business needs. Often one ISP rejected another until a mutually-agreeable solution could be worked out. Some ISPs could peer with others, some had to pay.
Any of the "OMG not neutral!" stuff I hear about today is about someone making big money from pushing Tbps of content into someone else's network and expecting that company to pay for all of it. It takes two to tango.
And while there may come a day when some end-user ISP is dumb enough to actually try to provide less-than-Internet to their subscribers, to date it hasn't really happened (sorry pirates), even in situations where the ISP is granted a local monopoly (which, of course, is the real lack of Internet freedom).